Tea at Trianon: "Findings"

John Wilson Croker on Marie-Antoinette

"We have followed the history of Marie Antoinette with the greatest diligence and scrupulosity. We have lived in those times. We have talked with some of her friends and some of her enemies; we have read, certainly not all, but hundreds of the libels written against her; and we have, in short, examined her life with– if we may be allowed to say so of ourselves– something of the accuracy of contemporaries, the diligence of inquirers, and the impartiality of historians, all combined; and we feel it our duty to declare, in as a solemn a manner as literature admits of, our well-matured opinion that every reproach against the morals of the queen was a gross calumny– that she was, as we have said, one of the purest of human beings."

~from History of the Guillotine by John Wilson Croker, 1844

Edmund Burke on Marie-Antoinette

"It is now sixteen or seventeen years since I saw the queen of France, then dauphiness, at Versailles; and surely there never lighted on this orb, which she hardly seemed to touch, a more delightful vision. I saw her just above the horizon, decorating and cheering the elevated sphere she had just begun to move in, glittering like a morning star full of life and splendor and joy. Oh, what a revolution....Little did I dream that I should have lived to see such disasters fall upon her, in a nation of gallant men, in a nation of men of honor and of cavaliers! I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards, to avenge even a look which threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone; that of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded...."

~Edmund Burke, October 1790

Monday, January 4, 2016

"Findings"

I agree with Anna about the alleged "findings" concerning Marie-Antoinette and Count von Fersen. To quote:

I debated even posting about it since I don’t feel like wading into potential arguments but this is just getting ridiculous....I honestly can’t believe that someone, especially someone who calls themselves a historian, is saying a diplomat spreading gossip is evidence that two of Louis XVI’s children are actually Fersen’s. Would she also argue that Marie Therese must be Artois’ child, since there were rumors circulating after her birth that said so? I mean, someone wrote it–therefore it’s damning evidence!

Anna is absolutely right. Since when did court "gossip" become proof of anything? There is plenty of evidence that the Queen was a faithful wife but people keep insisting upon believing a fairy tale. Also, I have seen the so-called "love letters" which allegedly have secret romantic messages embedded in them: the interpretations seem spurious to me. But even if love messages are there, none of it is proof that Marie-Antoinette was Fersen's mistress and that she bore him children. I will go into it more in my new book which hopefully will be out in about a month. Such romantic nonsense is a waste of time when there are so many more important things to think about.

For those interested, HERE is my talk on the subject and HERE. Share